‘FORD to City: Drop Dead” was the headline that defined the fiscal crisis of the ’70s. What will define the ’00s?

How about “Bloomy to City: Get Over It!”?

That’s Mike Bloomberg’s message for any New Yorkers riled up about a smoking ban that he didn’t campaign on – yet made an immediate priority to office, and jammed into law with barely a public discussion.

The mayor doesn’t believe any more talk is necessary. Two weeks ago, mere days into the brave new smoke-free world, annoyed locals tried to vent on Hizzoner’s weekly radio show. He would have none of it: “Let’s get over it. This is the law of the land,” he snapped.

After two calls on the topic, he told his radio co-host, “No [more] smoking calls.”

Remarkably, Bloomberg went on to proclaim confidently to his radio audience: “I’m going to get re-elected. . . . We’re doing a pretty good job . . . I think the public’s pretty happy.”

Oh, really?

Two-and-a-half years to the next election. Not so fast, Mr. Mayor.

Yes, Bloomberg has to deal with big problems like the budget deficit. But the accumulation of “little things” can doom a politician.

Especially, the politician who doesn’t realize that there is a fine line between confidence – and arrogance.

Hours after Bloomberg was telling people to “get over it,” one smoker cast into the chilly air outside of the Old Town Bar & Grill in the Flatiron District, Rusty Iodice, a 36-year old salesman, complained about the “bogus data” used to justify the ban in the name of workplace safety.

Iodice particularly decried the “paternalistic” attitude that drove the ban in the first place. “Once we allow an activist government to pass laws banning products that are unpalatable to one group, they will find the next thing that is unpalatable and work to ban that. Where does it stop?”

Well, it doesn’t.

A few days later, Bloomberg asked the City Council to boost the penalties for violating the city’s open-container laws – hiking the fine from a maximum of $25 to a minimum of $25 and a maximum of $150, with possible jail time, to boot.

The target: smokers who might try to take their beer outside with them as they puff away.

Michael Bloomberg should understand that, to be blunt, he is an accidental mayor – the product of a series of unlikely and tragic events.

Would the never-before-elected-for-anything billionaire have won if not for 9/11? Or without the endorsement of a Rudy Giuliani who’d practically become a minor deity after leading the city through the worst period of its history?

Or if the Democratic Party hadn’t split on racial lines in campaign’s final weeks?

Even with those factors – and spending spend more than $70 million – Bloomberg still won with barely 50 percent of the vote.

And next time, New Yorkers will know who this man is.

The mayor who tells smokers to “get over it” this year is the same (confident? arrogant?) mayor who told bodega operators last year that losing sales because of a hike in cigarette taxes was a “minor economic issue.”

A veteran political observer noted recently, “Michael Bloomberg is a businessman who seems to have forgotten who his customers are.”

Worse, he is a businessman who doesn’t seem to care whether other businessmen stay in business.

Bloomberg claims his corporate restaurateur pals like Steve Hanson owner of Park Avalon, Blue Finn, Isabella and other tony establishments tell him that the smoking ban isn’t hurting their bottom line. Yet even Hanson admits that small, neighborhood places are feeling the pain.

A cursory look at Mooney’s Pub – a classic Park Slope “small, neighborhood place” – confirms the drop-off in customers, most prominent among those likely to stick around for more than one beer with their cigarette. And the drop-off can’t simply be blamed on the rough economy or the war, factors that were in existence the week before.

The question of “what’s next?” is in bartender Scott Parish’s mind too. He fears potential noise complaints from apartment dwellers above bothered by the smokers outside, particularly as the weather gets warmer and windows are opened.

The same mayor who tells angry voters to “get over it” applauds the “courage” of 41 City Council members who voted to boost property taxes 18.5 percent and continues to plot revenge against the six (!) members who voted against.

The image taking shape is an unpleasant one.

A billionaire mayor feels that regardless of the issue, he is right. Disagreement is not to be tolerated. Opposing voices – even those of potential voters on the radio – are to be dismissed.

Cigarette smokers.

Bar owners.

Bodega proprietors.

Home owners.

Exactly how many people does a plurality mayor have to anger before his support dips below the 50 percent that voted for him the first time?

And what message will the voters have for a (confident? arrogant?) billionaire, if he loses the next time?